Davisite logo
Davisite Banner. Left side the bicycle obelisk at 3rd and University. Right side the trellis at the entrance to the Arboretum.

Category: Transportation

  • There’s no place to park there

    By Bertie Brouhard

    [Note: We at the Davisite hope to feature Bertie’s columns going forward with the permission of the author and the DE]

    There? Where’s “there?” Are you driving to the Marina in San Francisco? Sutter Hospital in Sacramento? Yosemite Valley? South Shore at Lake Tahoe? 

    Not just major attractions in big urban centers, but I hear the complaint about midtown Sacramento or Golden One and certainly for many places in our fine city of Davis. “There’s no place to park!” 

    All I have are my observations which I capture visually as a street photographer and hopefully entertain you with words in this column. And I love automobiles having been born into, raised by and shaped in an exciting, vibrant car culture.

    My dad cherished his Scotch-plaid-seated Chrysler, his yellow Buick Special Convertible with the red leather seats, his sporty white V-8 Studebaker Hawk and his grumbling Hemi Dodge Charger. In 1976, when my family of four left Cleveland for Colorado Springs in our new red Plymouth Volare station wagon, I was riding higher than ever.

    We’ve since travelled in Chevy station wagons, a Dodge Caravan and several boring but practical sedans. Currently, I have a Mini Cooper and a Dodge Promaster RV. 

    Now proudly 80, I recently passed the eye test and had my driver’s license renewed for five more years. I don’t intend to renew it again! 

    (more…)

  • Why Traffic “Improvements” Destroy Cities

    By Tim Keller

    I would like to briefly weigh in on one of the elements of the debate currently being waged online regarding Measure V.

    Opponents complain that the new residents will clog our streets with “traffic” while supporters of the project point out that Village Farms will pay for “traffic improvements” that will mitigate or perhaps even improve traffic. 

    It is my distinct impression that both sides of that debate are missing the most important question: What exactly are “traffic improvements”?

    In practice, “traffic engineering” is usually shorthand for constructing LARGER intersections: adding pavement, turn lanes, traffic lights, slip lanes, and other infrastructure intended to move more cars through an area more efficiently.

    You can optimize signal timing to some degree, but beyond that, most “traffic improvements” simply mean making more room for automobiles.  This is not necessarily something we should be cheering for.

    As urban planner Lewis Mumford warned all the way back in 1955:

    “Adding lanes to deal with traffic congestion is like loosening your belt to cure obesity.”

    Consider these two downtown intersections here in Davis:

    (more…)

  • Village Farms – Much To Do About (Developer Double-)Crossings

    Original visual used by Yes on V of Village Farms to North Star bridge, now deleted.

    by Tuvia ben Olam DBA Todd Edelman

    l lived in the Czech Republic for about seven years – where I did similar mobility curmudgeon work as I do here, BUT everyone from local district mayors to engineering company bosses liked me because my father is Slovak and I’m Jewish… but mostly because I was an activist with constructive ideas. Imagine that!

    In the Czech Language the term for “communication” generally encompasses systems and technology for things like the Internet and physical transportation infrastructure, for example…. bridges!

    In that framework or lens I offer now a hopefully somewhat fresh look at bridges and the communication about bridges connected with projects of the Seven Generational Families of Davis (Henceforth: The Seven).

    Still, the obvious place to start is Promenade (Formerly Known as Nishi)…

    I’m binging GoT right now. That’s all.

    The Bridge of Friendship between The Seven and Union Pacific

    In a May 16th Op-Ed for the Davis Vanguard – its title is the basis for mine for this article – The Seven’s Sandy Whitcombe refers to the claim of Measure V opponents that “… Union Pacific Railroad (henceforth: UP) is holding up a grade-separated crossing”. She then says she wishes that the opponents “…asked us first…” about it.

    Well, back in December 2017 during my first meeting on the Bicycling, Transportation and Street Safety Commission (BTSSC – the predecessor to the Transportation Commission), the then Assistant City Manager Ashley Feeney told us that City had a good relationship with UP and it would likely be possible to have a level crossing between Arboretum Drive and Nishi. Later on, as the proposal moved through Council’s approval step in County annexation and then towards the popular vote, the documents for the project referred to a “grade-separated crossing” but the main imagery I recall – and could find in a search – was an undercrossing. 

    Visual by Promenade (Nishi) proponents from 2017 or so.

    (more…)

  • Proposals for city budget fall far short of what is needed to address severe funding gap

    [The following email from Dan Carson was shared with the Davisite for posting]

    Dear City Council and Fiscal Commissioners:

    Attached please find a city staff report authored by the City Manager and the Finance Department — dated May 19, 2026 and titled “Fiscal Year 2026/27 Mid-Cycle Budget Update” — that was recently provided to you for public hearings this week. Given the brief timeline available for public consideration of this report by the Council and the Commission, I am sharing these comments with you in the interests of ensuring that you obtain critical information needed to assess the proposed actions and their potential effect on our city’s fiscal stability and integrity.  

    Click to access 06-FY26-27-Mid-Cycle-Budget-Update.pdf

    As you know, I served as a fiscal advisor to the California Legislature for 17 years, concluding my state career as Deputy Legislative Analyst of the nonpartisan and independent Legislative Analyst’s Office before serving for nine years on the City of Davis Finance and Budget Commission and then the City Council.  

    In summary, my analyses indicates that the first steps to address the city’s budget shortfalls being proposed by city management are reasonable but will fall far short of what is needed to address a severe funding gap caused primarily by dramatic and excessive increases in employee pay and benefits approved by the Council in a series of recent multi-year labor contracts. The budget package also does not provide the level of funding needed to fix our roads and bike paths and other infrastructure and discloses that it “defers” more capital improvement projects it does not identify. I recommend the Commission and the Council take a series of actions described below to address these issues.

    (more…)

  • A Long-Term, Pragmatic Plan for a Livable & Sustainable Davis

    By The Davis Citizens Planning Group

    The Davis Citizens planning group would like to present our vision for a pragmatic, realistic, and sustainable way to develop our city going forward.   This vision represents several months of work and builds upon a series of articles we have published over the past two years on the topics of how we might plan our city to have housing that is  more affordable, sustainable, and a city that is more liveable and economically viable.

    In the past we have framed our commentary in a reactive way with respect to the developments in the housing proposals being considered.   Going forward, we have decided to be more proactive, starting with best practices, and advocating for a top-down city-wide vision for how we develop our city not just for the upcoming 25-year general plan cycle, but looking towards the end of the century.

    Over the past few decades, more and more thinkers in the field of urban planning have come around to endorsing what is essentially the same set of strategies for urban planning:

    (more…)

  • UCD Sustainable Transportation Plan Open for Public Review Through May 4

    Students navigate a mix of bikes, e-scooters, skateboards, and foot traffic on campus—illustrating the growing complexity of how people move through the Davis campus. (Courtesy photo / UC Davis)

    (From press release) UC Davis is inviting the broader Davis community to review and comment on a draft of its updated sustainable transportation plan through May 4.

    The plan—called Moving Forward Together—has been in development for over a year and outlines more than 100 possible improvements for how people get to and move through campus, from safer crossings and separated bike paths to better transit connections. It marks the first comprehensive update since 2009, with recommendations supported by input from more than 3,000 people, along with an analysis of travel patterns, infrastructure gaps, and collision data.

    Why this plan matters

    (more…)

  • Why I Now Support Village Farms Davis

    by Alan Pryor

    Introduction

    I have been a fairly consistent opponent of most peripheral development projects in Davis over the past decade. For instance, I was the Principal Officer, Treasurer, and Chair or Co-Chair of the No on Nishi 1 (Student Housing),  No on West Davis Active Adult Community (Senior Housing), and both the No on both DISC 1 and DISC 2 campaigns (primarily Commercial).

    All of those peripheral annexation measures failed except West Davis Active Adult Community. But none of these projects provided for family housing for modest income buyers. I think Davis desperately needs that type of family housing and I believe the Village Farms Davis project provides it so I support the Project.

    As a result, I recently both publicly endorsed the Yes on Measure V campaign and was a  co-signer of the Rebuttal to the Argument Against Measure V that will appear on the June ballot.

    Many folks that I had previously worked with opposing other projects have accused me of abandoning my slow-growth and/or environmental principles after hearing of my endorsement of Village Farms Davis or reading some of the articles I have published about various environmental aspects of the project. Some are saying it is inexplicable to them why I would make this seemingly sudden change in my views toward peripheral development and endorse this Project.

    Well, the reasons are actually pretty simple. I opposed past peripheral development projects because I did not feel any met all of the 3 primary criteria that I look at when considering supporting or opposing a project. And the reason I can now support Village Farms Davis is because I can now check-off each of the boxes for the same 3 criteria – 1) the Features of the Project itself, 2) the Location of the Project, and 3) the Quality of the Developers of the Project.

    Let me explain.

    (more…)

  • Rebuttals to for-and-against ballot arguments are now available

    Roberta Millstein

    In an earlier article, I posted the for and against arguments for the Village Farms project. The rebuttals to each of these arguments are now available on the County’s website, and I have pasted them below. Village Farms is subject to a Measure J/R/D vote of all Davis citizens and has been assigned as Measure V.

    Here is the rebuttal to the argument in favor of Village Farms that will appear on our ballots in June (the rebuttal to the argument against follows after that):

    (more…)

  • Ballot arguments for and against Village Farms now available

    By Roberta Millstein

    This post is to just let people know that the arguments for and against the Village Farms project are up on the County’s website. The rebuttals to the for and against arguments are due by March 3; I will post them at some point afterward. Village Farms is subject to a Measure J/R/D vote of all Davis citizens and has been assigned as Measure V.

    Here is the argument in favor of Village Farms, i.e., in favor of Measure V, that will appear on our ballots in June (the argument against follows after that):

    (more…)

  • Setting the Record Straight – Part 1

    Myths vs. Facts about Village Farms Davis

    by Alan Pryor

    I. INTRODUCTION

    Opponents of Village Farms Davis have made numerous misleading and/or outright false claims about the Project and its supposed adverse environmental impacts on Davis and its residents. Their allegations are made without almost no quantitative supporting data from independent, verifiable 3rd-party sources to support their claims. Unfortunately, these naysayers instead rely on speculation and innuendo to attempt to disparage and denigrate the proposed Project.

    This article is the first in a series that will present detailed information that factually refutes each of these untrue “myths” and false allegations made by project opponents . This first article summarizes the false claims and provides a brief summary response followed by a more in-depth discussion refuting some of the allegations that require additional information to refute them. Subsequent articles in the coming weeks will further address some of these false claims in much greater detail.

    (more…)